<img width="1" height="1" src="https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/op/Vm4n2x9nReHL5IYZQuZ1Jy0O2msyCGXYBCL2Ygj5Xs56mr3J2mwyhDtb9NJqwVkqytGfgxEnev1Q3Mh58Gfe48ao0X-0qQ2sH8cZPI2OjABbEMLFdWhoS34E8R8A2gbcdTyaoXSJhNmSseCnKxu91TV25e0nAzdSEZsBzrIVCX44ZkSD_TkY_XVyBrfjUkkmlS-SIGYsUE5hLzWzhxADcRD4zLcbOreVn_h-" style="mso-hide:all"/><div dir="ltr"><div>Seems to me the implementation of the satellite offices was not done intelligently. </div><div><br></div><div>For starters, while I'm in favor of the PTO having physical offices with all members of a GAU in the same office (see below), if you're going to allow people to work from home, as the PTO does, then there's little sense in having physical offices.</div><div><br></div><div>Second, if you're going to have physical offices, then the entire art unit should be in the same physical office. It's better for training, it's better for institutional memory and continuity, it's better for applicants.</div><div><br></div><div>Third, an impetus, perhaps the principal impetus, for setting up satellite offices was that the cost of living in DC/NoVA was high. So in that regard, a Detroit office sort of made sense, although locating it in downtown Detroit probably made less sense. But even if they'd put it in the suburbs, public transportation in southeast Michigan is poor, so Michigan might not have been the best choice. But San Jose as a cheaper alternative to DC? Maybe SJ is better than San Francisco, but I'm certain there are less expensive areas that could have served the purpose. If all the people working in GAUs related to Silicon Valley technologies were located in the San Jose office, using the SJ location might have made sense. But that's not the way it was done, so why put it specifically in SJ in the first place?</div><div><br></div><div>Anyway, sounds like the Denver "office" was never really an office.</div><div><span><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div><br></div>Dan</div></div></div></span></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Oct 1, 2025 at 7:54\u202fAM Carl Oppedahl via Patentpractice <<a href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
<div>
<div>On 9/29/2025 4:15 PM, David Hricik via
Patentpractice wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
<div>I also heard a rumor (maybe it is old news) that the Denver
regional office employees were not part of a back-to-the-office
order, and rumor is it is shutting down? </div>
</blockquote>
<p>Well, folks, you heard it here from David first.</p>
<p>Yes, the USPTO just now announced that it is going to shut down
the Denver patent office.</p>
<p>I guess one might have seen this coming, when the Director of the
Denver patent office, Molly Kocialski announced (three weeks ago)
that she was done at the Denver patent office and had joined the
well known Denver law firm Holland and Hart.</p>
<p>The USPTO's announcement says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>As of December of 2024, the number of employees in the Rocky
Mountain office had dropped to less than 10. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Of course the correct way to say it would have been "fewer than
10".</p>
<p>But anyway, yes it seems the Denver patent office will close.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
</div>
-- <br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a href="https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/NsrvIAVY_cfqjYpYMAO5IUAq3jKDwu3IUlupgVcbTkN3dCh8Hs99JQq1vVN9eTsIjWcVfcmH7T83gs53wdmh363HHuQ7yn0WZfPevh9ijYEuxD_RF6Vs4P-ZUgms8ghUr1mqdk8uo2TrvBOHEmJaimWlWOMmsujgAhjTbndMtbJ2e-_jo_weWjCCi10VXqJKq-WiVDT4Ud80DiebDmahxIJnXqIlBlBbtUArb74ND7nBiyZvv0F1U9XPI8wOmbQrNEB6HAm_jR6GB8Aa-G10ippfgb5e9AzmXAWPxDvNgmjva7h9nI0tOpwZr63iup13zvzOeLmat3smKCrtpNxi1IOQbdhcVPYGSg9Q" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
</blockquote></div>